摘自遠景基金會http://www.pf.org.tw:8080/FCKM_WEB/inter/research/report_detail.jsp?report_id=6749

篇名： 面對中共崛起美不應自東亞經濟領域退卻

中文關鍵字： 美中關係;中國崛起

出版年月： 200904

中文摘要：
美國「凱托研究所」（Cato Institute）資深研究員班都（Doug Bandow）撰文指出：
（一）中共日益具有自信，不但在南海挑戰美國船艦，也在國際論壇挑戰美元的地位。中共已取代美國成為東亞主要國家的最大貿易夥伴，而且正建立即使無法擊敗美軍，也足以嚇阻美軍的戰力，但歐巴馬政府和民主黨主導下的國會卻是以在經濟上撤出東亞，來回應此一趨勢。歐巴馬在參議員任內曾將美國和南韓自由貿易協定指為「存有嚴重問題」，呼籲當時的布希政府，甚至無須將協定送交國會批准。美國貿易代表柯克（Ron Kirk）在國會審議他的提名案時稱，美、韓協定「令人無法接受」。當時柯克說，雖然和南韓加強貿易是「我們的最大機會之一」，若「作法不對，歐巴馬政府仍可拋棄之」。但這是經濟和地緣戰略上的愚蠢政策，美國應有的作法是擴大在東亞的投資和貿易，並以批准美、韓自由貿易協定為起點。

（二）但經濟並非問題的全部，美、韓自由貿易協定也只是東亞地緣政治棋局之一，中共在崛起的同時正與優勢漸失的美國形成碰撞，而強化貿易關係乃是美國確保其在東亞影響力之道。美國仍是全球唯一超強，中共則正謹慎擴軍，以建立足以嚇阻美國介入東亞的軍力，因此美國將日益難以憑藉軍力達成目標。

（三）中共的擴張正改變亞洲經濟模式，如今東亞已成為區域貿易措施的溫床，簽定各種範圍和包羅對象不同的公約，而推動這種進程的力量，正是中共不斷擴大的經濟角色。但中共對這種逐步演變並不滿意，美國國會「美中經濟暨安全檢討委員會」（USCC）警告，「中共已在亞洲各地憑藉不斷壯大的經濟力量來施展外交強勢作為；不僅如此，中共還為雙邊夥伴關係和多邊貿易與安全措施注入了新動能」。事實上，中共一直與澳、日、南等國商討自由貿易協定，中共執行此一戰略，即象徵美國如今所面臨的挑戰。
（04.27美國凱托研究所）

原文載點http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10151 

An Economic Retreat from East Asia
by Doug Bandow

Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former special assistant to President Reagan, he is the author of Tripwire: Korea and U.S. Foreign Policy in a Changed World (Cato Institute) and co-author of The Korean Conundrum: America's Troubled Relations with North and South Korea (Palgrave/Macmillan).

Added to cato.org on April 27, 2009

This article appeared in the American Spectator on April 27, 2009

How do the Obama administration and Democratic Congress respond? By retreating economically from the region. Sen. Barack Obama termed the U.S.-South Korean free trade agreement (FTA) "badly flawed" and urged the Bush administration not to even submit it for ratification. At his confirmation hearing U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk called the agreement "unacceptable." Although increased trade with the Republic of Korea (ROK) is "one of the biggest opportunities we have," he affirmed that the administration "will step away from that if we don't get it right." This policy is remarkable for both its economic and geostrategic folly.

Washington instead should be expanding American investment and trade opportunities in East Asia. The starting point should be to ratify the FTA with the ROK.

South Korea possesses one of the world's largest economies and is among the top dozen trading nations. Total U.S.-ROK trade ran more than $80 billion in 2008. The seventh largest merchandise trading partner of the U.S., Seoul is a major importer of aircraft, cereals, chemicals, machinery, and plastics. Even a small expansion of U.S.-ROK trade would offer a significant benefit for America's economy.

The FTA offers unusual potential because South Korea has been a notoriously closed market. Dependent on exports for its stunning economic success, the ROK is far less hospitable to other nation's exports, including from the U.S. The Korea Economic Institute reported: "Korea remains a very difficult place in which to do business."

The FTA responds by helping to open the Korean market. Jeffrey Schott of the Peterson Institute for International Economics reported: "The U.S.-Korea pact covers more trade than any other U.S. trade agreement except the North American Free Trade Agreement" and "opens up substantial new opportunities for bilateral trade and investment in goods and services."

More specifically, reports the U.S. Trade Representative:

In addition to eliminating South Korea's seven percent average tariff on industrial goods, the KORUS FTA effectively addresses a wide range of discriminatory non-tariff barriers to U.S. goods and services. It will improve regulatory procedures and due process in South Korea through the most advanced transparency obligations in any U.S. FTA to date. In addition, the Agreement contains an unprecedented package of automotive related provisions, including a unique dispute settlement mechanism that will level the playing field for U.S. automakers in this important market.
Obviously, the FTA does not eliminate all economic barriers in the ROK. Sen. Obama was one of many critics to point to continued Korean restrictions on the sale of U.S. autos and agricultural products. But the pact makes important progress. Explained Schott: "The FTA outcome on autos makes both sides better off than they would be in the absence of the bilateral deal" and "the FTA liberalization of farm trade predominantly benefits U.S. agricultural exporters."

Moreover, Seoul is in no mood to make concessions to the Obama administration. ROK President Roh Moo-hyun negotiated the treaty at some political cost. His successor, Lee Myung-bak, already has been attacked for easing restrictions on American beef imports. Trade Minister Kim Jong-hoon declared simply: "There are [to be] no renegotiations or additional negotiations."

The U.S., whose share of total Korean imports has been falling, would obviously benefit from the pact. The likely increase in exports, perhaps $20 billion annually, would be particularly helpful in the midst of today's deep recession. Demand for American audiovisual, financial, and telecommunications services also likely would increase substantially. Overall, the U.S. International Trade Commission figures that American exports to South Korea would rise nearly twice as much as imports from the ROK. Since the South's per capita GDP today is well below that of the U.S., South Korean demand is likely to increase even more over the longer-term. Even more so if the two Koreas eventually reunite.

Economics is not the sum total of the issue, however. The Korean FTA is part of East Asia's great geopolitical game. A rising China is bumping up against a less dominant America; strengthening trade ties is one way for Washington to ensure continued American influence in the region.

The U.S. remains the globe's sole superpower, with the ability to project power into every region. But the PRC is engaged in a measured military build-up directed at creating armed forces capable of deterring American intervention in East Asia. Washington will find it increasingly difficult to achieve its objectives with military force.

Despite the Wall Street crash last fall, the U.S. retains the world's largest and most productive economy. And China has not escaped unscathed from the global downturn. However, Washington's economic dominance in East Asia is waning. By some measures the PRC has surpassed Japan as possessing the second largest economy.

Moreover, China's rapid economic growth has naturally led to expanded investment and trade throughout East Asia. American companies have been pushed into second and even third place in South Korea and Japan.

China's expansion is changing East Asia economic patterns. Noted Schott: "The region is the hotbed of regional trading arrangements, with a variety of pacts differing in scope and coverage." Driving this process is China's growing economic role. The impact on the ROK has been particularly significant. Observed Robert Kapp, a long-time president of the United States-China Business Council: "The growth of Korean-Chinese economic action has been even more impressive than China's expanding ties with other trade and investment partners."

Beijing is not content to rely on osmosis. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission warned: "China has linked its growing economic power with strong diplomatic initiatives throughout Asia. China's softer approach to the region has been dubbed a smile campaign or charm offensive, but it is more than just that -- China has injected new energy into bilateral partnerships and multilateral trade and security arrangements."

In fact, Beijing has been negotiating or discussing free trade agreements with Australia, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, among other countries. The economic and political barriers to such arrangements are obvious, but the fact that the PRC is pursuing this strategy -- and that America's three leading military allies in the region as well as another one-time ally and long-term friend, which enjoys an implicit security guarantee from Washington, view FTAs with China as a serious option -- symbolizes the challenge now facing Washington.

South Korea is not waiting for the U.S. The ROK has negotiated FTAs with the ASEAN (Southeast Asian) states and several European countries. Moreover, reports the Korea Economic Institute: "In March, Korea and the EU announced the tentative conclusion of FTA negotiations, while Korea also announced that it will commence FTA negotiations with Australia, New Zealand, and Peru. The EU deal, when completed, will be the world's largest bilateral trade agreement, eclipsing the still unapproved U.S.-Korea FTA."

Yet the U.S.-ROK FTA sits unratified in Washington. Washington's influence in East Asia is slowly ebbing. Rather than retreating quietly, the U.S. should strengthen its economic role by expanding trade and investment ties throughout the region. Washington should pursue FTAs with Japan and Taiwan. But first Congress should ratify the already-negotiated accord with South Korea.

The primary benefit of the agreement is economic. But expanding trade ties offer geopolitical advantages as well. The Bush administration may have overstated the benefits, but only slightly, when it argued: "By boosting economic ties and broadening and modernizing our longstanding alliance, it promises to become the pillar of our alliance for the next 50 years, as the Mutual Defense Treaty has been for the last 50 years." Seoul has a similar objective. Wrote Kozo Kiyota and Robert Stern of the University of Michigan: "Korean officials hope that there will be positive spillover effects from an FTA on the broader bilateral relationship."

Moving forward will require genuine statesmanship backed by political courage from the Obama administration. Failing to ratify the South Korean FTA is likely to result in permanent economic and geopolitical damage. Warned Jeffrey Schott: "The stakes -- in terms of both U.S. economic and security interests in East Asia -- are too great, and the costs too high, to reject the pact or defer a decision."

This would be a high price to pay at any time, but especially when China is rapidly expanding its influence throughout East Asia.